After 4 hours of discussion about bike lanes at yesterday’s Transportation Committee meeting, the committee moved to have City Administration take the 76 Ave and 121 Ave routes back to those communities for more consultation. 132 Ave will be postponed until the entire stretch of 132 Ave is looked at in a future year, and Administration will also report on the consultation steps taken this year.

The remaining 2013 on-street routes are still on-track.

Thanks to everyone that spoke out in support of the bike routes. From doctors to business owners to homeowners along priority bike routes, to cyclists across the city, the unprecedented level of support made a big difference. This will be an ongoing discussion in Edmonton, and we consider the attention that cycling issues are receiving now to be a good sign.

Speaking to council is as simple as registering and then speaking for up to 5 minutes (but you are welcome to speak for less time if you prefer). You can use a Powerpoint presentation if you like (most people don’t).

Register online to speak on agenda item 7.2: Bike Lanes – Consultation Process and Impacts. This is an online form that only takes 60 seconds to fill out. You can also register by telephone at 780-496-8178 from 8am-4:30pm. Not sure if you can make it? Register anyway! You can cancel by telephone or e-mail (you’ll receive a confirmation e-mail). You may register in-person at City Hall only until 9:30am on Wednesday.

On Wednesday at 1:30pm, Administration will make a presentation.

The Committee will hear from Speakers in panels.

Each speaker will have up to five minutes to make his or her presentation. The “green” light will come on at the start of the five minutes, followed by the “yellow” light when one minute is left. At this point the presenter is requested to sum up the presentation. The “red” light will come on at the end of five minutes.

After all speakers within a panel have spoken, Members of Council may ask questions of the panel of speakers.

Once all presenters have spoken, Members of the Council may then ask questions of Administration.

The Committee will then debate the item.

You may wish to focus on just a single topic, or tell your story about how you’ll use the bike infrastructure.

Bike lanes make roads safer. Without a designated space on the road, cyclists face a heightened risk of injury from moving cars and car doors opening. In contrast, infrastructure designed for cyclists &em; including bike lanes on major streets without parked cars, residential street bike routes, and off-street bike paths &em; carries about half the risk, while cycle tracks (physically separated bike lanes) carries the lowest injury risk for cyclists, at about one-tenth the risk. (UBC)

Lack of physical activity is associated with increased obesity, heart disease, diabetes, cancer risk, and mental health issues. Bike lanes encourage more people to use active transportation. If you bike to work each weekday, just 15 minutes each way, your life expectancy goes up by 3.4 years. If just 24 people biked 20 minutes per day thanks to new lanes, it would add up to over 80 years of increased life expectancy: the average life expectancy in Alberta. (National Cancer Institute)

Building bike infrastructure is about giving people choice, not about taking away choice. Additionally, cycling is accessible regardless of a person’s economic situation. (EBC’s adult bikes start at $40.)

More people cycling results in less congestion, more parking availability, and cleaner air.

Edmonton has markedly under-invested in cycling infrastructure. With 44 million square metres of roadway network, on-street bike routes are found on less than 1% of Edmonton roads, even though 35% of Edmontonians cycle weekly in the summer and fall.

Cycling infrastructure is a good investment in the health and well-being of citizens. At four tenths of one per cent of the road budget, it’s also a good economic investment with a high return on investment. Since beginning construction in 2010, 46km of on-street bike routes have only cost about $3 million. In contrast, Scona Road rehabilitation, necessitated by increased auto traffic, cost about $15.8 million per km (16 kilometres of construction would have cost about $726.8 million). 36 metres of the 23 Avenue interchange could have been built with $3 million dollars. A Canadian football field is 59 metres wide and 137 metres long.

Edmontonians cycle year-round, and more will do so with the right infrastructure. When the last household travel survey was completed in 2005, the average temperature was 1°C. Edmontonians made 25,000 trips per day by bicycle during that period, both for transportation and recreation. Soccer pitches, outdoor rinks and pools, and many other purely recreational facilities, on the other hand, are strictly seasonal, yet we do not argue against their value because of this. And Edmonton isn’t even that cold.

Council has a mandate to support cycling infrastructure:

The Way Ahead (approved 2011): called for 120km of on-street cycling facilities in 3 years, with a goal to shift transportation modes

The Way We Move, Transportation Master Plan (approved 2009): It has been shown in other cities that it is not possible to build enough roads to manage demand. As such, the City of Edmonton will need to place greater emphasis on strategies to optimize the use of the existing road system and shift residents to other modes.

Strategic Action 7.1(c): Using transportation supply management strategies to promote increased use of travel modes other than the single occupant vehicle, including reallocation of existing road space.

Policy 5.7.1.2: Support the design of street systems to be easily navigated by pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles and to provide clear and direct connections between major activity areas in the community.

Policy 5.7.1.3: Support opportunities to reallocate existing road space for use by pedestrians, cyclists and transit service.

The Way We Live, Edmonton’s People Plan (approved 2009): Includes goals of connectivity, health, and sustainability

Optimization of the Transportation System Network Policy, Policy C569 (approved 2012): The City will develop and apply a framework for congestion management that considers
all modes of transportation, including pedestrians, cyclists, transit, autos and goods movement. To address instances of congestion it is recognized that trade-offs will be necessary and sometimes roadway improvements will be made for one mode at the expense of another mode.

I’m a homeowner in Valleyview, Ward 1, and I bike all over this city, including the proposed 2013 on-street bike routes. You bike in front of my house occasionally, on a road that is part of those bike routes. This simple fact makes me smile, because bikes are like that: joyful.

In 2010, you said:

“The fact of the matter is that this city never had a vision, and you have to be competitive. If we want my kid to stay here — which I desperately want my kid to want to stay in Edmonton — we damn well better have a city that they see has a future. And we weren’t having that.” [^]

Since 2010, you and your fellow councillors have developed and approved an award-winning vision for Edmonton. And you’ve codified that in bylaw and policy. Please don’t let that vision become a dust-covered trophy, abandoned before even a single term is over.

Part of that vision includes bike lanes. Why? To make the city a better place to live.

Bike lanes encourage people to ride more. Women and children, especially: the most cautious of road users. [University of Minnesota]

More people riding means healthier active people and stronger, safer communities. A single hour of bicycle riding translates to a life-expectancy gain of 63 minutes (even without a helmet!). In special relativity, we’d call that time dilation, but happening at the pace of a leisurely bike ride. It’s also something of a lucrative panacea in terms of public health: heart disease, obesity, cancer, and a host of other diseases are all linked to physical activity and cost the Canadian economy billions of dollars each year. And lives. [Richard Johns, UBC]

Last week you re-affirmed your position that bike lanes, and the benefits they promise for quality of life in Edmonton, are a good idea.

But you also were quoted saying “it just seems someone…decided we’re going to eliminate all vehicles and only have bikes.”[^]

The bike routes are not about “eliminating all vehicles”. After all, bicycles are vehicles too.

Let’s look at 76 Ave: same number of traffic lanes (plus 2 bike lanes), and on-street parking is retained on the south side of 76 Ave from 99-95 St, and the north side from 78-75 St. Along 96 St south of 76 Ave, the newly created on-street parking is generally nearer to the businesses than the north side of 76 Ave, since customers don’t have to double-back to the intersection and cross the road. The additional parking is, in that respect, safer and more convenient.

You will certainly see other examples of the serious consideration put into the design of these bike lanes, including detailed parking analyses and examples of changes made based on feedback from stakeholders (that particular route underwent several changes, returning on-street parking to businesses, even before the public open house occurred).

But these very specific details, while providing insight into the design and consultation processes, are not my debate to win or lose. Instead, I wish to go back to your vision:

No one ever decided to move to New York City or visit Paris for those cities’ abundant publicly-funded, free on-street parking. Cities do not become livable, vibrant, desirable places through doggedly hanging onto every on-street parking stall, a fact that you acknowledge in your plans for our future.

Neither is this about ramming through the bike lanes to the detriment of businesses. We’re looking for ways to make this city better, including its cycling infrastructure, and EBC has inquired about various concessions to alleviate concerns we’ve heard from all types of road users.

But you can’t have effective infrastructure if your bike lanes dump cyclists back into mixed traffic every other block. Each additional compromise has the real potential to push contiguous, quality infrastructure toward the gutter of the haphazard and ineffectual: the potential to turn good designs into “crap”. So every change must be made with caution and full awareness of its impacts.

So is this all just about consultation? Well, you are aware of the many consultations leading up to the 2009 Bicycle Transportation Plan. There were also consultations with businesses, churches, community leagues, and other stakeholders in January 2013, prior to the public open houses. The assumption seems to be that the open houses aren’t open to feedback, but I observed plenty of feedback being given, received, and recorded. Your own staff, again, I’m sure can provide details about the process. You hire engineers and planners because they are proficient in engineering and planning. They can’t know the nuances of every road, so they hold stakeholder meetings and public consultations. Would it be more efficient for the City to present blank maps with no design work whatsoever, and redevelop the Bicycle Transportation Plan anew every year? Of course not.

Was all this enough consultation? How can consultations be improved in the future? The Edmonton Bicycle Commuters’ Society is already meeting with communities that lie along future bike routes; we’d happily be involved in an expanded public consultation process.

But if “more consultation” is simply a euphemism for “throw out the core routes of the Bicycle Transportation Plan if they require space currently dedicated to cars”, then I encourage you to think about where Edmonton is headed.

“Compromise” doesn’t mean telling cyclists they should go find circuitous, hilly paths to wind their way around the city in order to avoid any inconvenience to motorists. That is no compromise: that is the status quo, where cars have dedicated space on 4700km of roadway and cyclists eke out a meagre existence in the interstices.

The status quo doesn’t align with your vision–nor the City’s vision, nor with mine. Tellingly, it also doesn’t align with the City’s own policies & bylaws.

The quality of service for cyclists will be more critical on roads that are part of the cycling network
– trade-offs will be necessary and sometimes roadways improvements will be made for one mode at the expense of another mode.

The use of travel modes other than single occupant vehicles will reduce demand on the road network.
7.3.b. Developing land use and parking policies that manage the supply of parking provided for a development with a focus on providing only essential parking and supporting Transportation Demand Management.

The City of Edmonton is hosting public consultations regarding the on-street bike routes they’re planning to construct this summer. The first meeting is this Tuesday from 6-8:30pm at Hazeldean School (6715 97 St). Please come out to show your support for cycling infrastructure and find out details about their design & location, and provide your input. The City has already made some improvements based on stakeholder feedback they’ve been receiving. You can learn about these latest changes, as well, at the meetings.

Both meetings will discuss all the planned routes. EBC will be on hand at both meetings to offer an external perspective on the lanes.

Highlights include buffered bike lanes for 106 St, 40 Ave, and 132 Ave, as well as a bike boulevard on 97 St. We have some areas of concern, but are working to address these with the City. If you have concerns of your own, whether as a resident, business owner, or cyclist, please contact us. We are eager to discuss possibilities to help create infrastructure that works well for everyone.

Media Advisory

The 2013 Edmonton municipal election will take place in October 2013. Stay tuned to this site for candidate profiles and more information. You can also subscribe to the Edmonton Bicycle Commuters’ Society mailing list at http://edmontonbikes.ca, follow us on Twitter @edmontonbicycle, and Facebook for instant updates.

When I sent out an urgent call to action two weeks ago, EBC members and supporters responded with élan: I received two dozen letters to council in as many hours, even though I’d neglected to ask people to send me copies. I know that many more letters were sent; councillors were discussing among themselves the number of e-mails they were receiving regarding Active Transportation (AT), and, in several interviews, councillors mentioned the volume of AT correspondence that they’d received.

Thank you. Your ardent response paid off: this Monday, Council ammended the budget to include $20 million for Active Transportation over the next three years. We started at $0 just two weeks ago.

We can also expect an additional $2 to $3 million worth of AT infrastructure to be built each year through Neighbourhood Renewal projects, including handicap ramps, missing sidewalks and bike lanes.

The draft text of the amendments are below. In addition to sidewalks, bike racks, and bike racks on buses, you can also look forward to:

Shared-Use Paths:

28 Ave (50 St to 91 St)

34 Ave (91 St to 99 St)

151 Ave (121 St to 127 St)

50 St (90 Ave to 92 Ave)

NE LRT Corridor (117 Ave / 78 St to 129 Ave / 66 St)

Argyll Park (Top of Bank)

On-Street Bike Routes:

83 Ave (97 St to 112 St)

95 Ave (142 St to 189 St)

100 Ave (102 St to 121 St)

101 Ave (50 St to 84 St)

102 Ave (111 St to 121 St)

121 Ave (Victoria Trail to 77 St)

127 Ave (72 St to 127 St)

50 St (98 Ave to 109A Ave)

79 St (76 Ave to 106 Ave)

106 St (34 Ave to 51 Ave)

189 St (87 Ave to 95 Ave)

Saddleback Road (completion of loop)

My term as president of the Edmonton Bicycle Commuters’ Society ended on November 30, and the new board of directorshas already begun its work, growing our organization’s voice and improving the services we provide to the community. The new board has a full plate: with a second northside shop on the horizon, renewed focus on education and programs for youth, and a push to further develop our already-strong volunteer base, EBC needs your support to continue its work.

If you haven’t renewed your membership in the past year, or you’re not yet a member, please consider joining and supporting us. You can sign-up or renew online, by mail, or in-person. For an organization of our size, your $15 or $20 a year is a significant contribution!

(If you’re not sure if you have an active membership, just e-mail info@edmontonbikes.ca and we’ll check for you.)

Thanks for your support through the years. See you on the new bike lanes!

2009: Council carries a motion directing Administration to prepare the 2012-2022 Capital Priorities Plan with a guideline of 5% of the Transportation Capital Budget toward Active Transportation.

2009: Council approves the Transportation Master Plan, stating: Public transportation and active transportation are the preferred choice for more people, making it possible to move more people more efficiently, reducing pressure on the roadways/need for increased investment, maximizing the effectiveness of financial investments and the efficiency of goods movement.

2010: Council approves the Municipal Development Plan (Bylaw 15100), stating: Ensure that streets, sidewalks and boulevards are designed to perform their diverse roles and to enable safe access for all users.

2011: Council approves The Way We Green approved by Council, stating: Resilient cities and neighbourhoods should prioritize active transportation as the preferred mode of travel and as a defining component of a healthy quality of life.

2011: Council is presented with the proposed 2012-2014 Capital Budget, with $0 recommended toward Active Transportation.

Remind City Hall of its commitments. Speak out for active transportation funding at the public hearing on Wednesday, November 23 at 9:30am at City Hall. It can be as simple and powerful as stating, “Active transportation is a priority for me, and it’s a priority in the City’s vision and strategy documents. Council needs to find a way to fund active transportation.” They’ll appreciate your brevity, and you’ll get your message across.

Can’t make the hearing? Send council a letter today letting them know that active transportation is important to you. It can simply be the two sentences above: Council just needs to hear from citizens that we care about active transportation.

Congratulations to all of the elected candidates. Thanks to everyone that contributed to this site, and especially to the candidates that took the time to respond to our questions.

All the responses will remain available on this site, and we’ll likely re-activate it in the coming months with more exciting work, but if you still want to be involved in cycling advocacy in Edmonton right now, please head to our main site, http://edmontonbikes.ca/ or contact us at info@edmontonbikes.ca. There’s always work to be done!

Election day is today. Look up where to vote here. You can use the form on the right side of this page to look up which wards you’re in.

The City of Edmonton’s Trails, Paths, and Routes Advisory Committee (TPRAC) co-chair, David Lloyd, sent out a survey to all candidates asking about their support for fully-funding active transportation in the city.

My name is David Lloyd; I’m co-chair of the City of Edmonton Trails,
Paths, and Routes Advisory Committee (TPRAC). The TPRAC is a public
consultative group communicating between multi-use trail, walkway, and
bikeway users and City civic administration and Council.

Each year, active transport is becoming a bigger and bigger issue in
municipal affairs. Recently, Council directed City Administration to
prepare the 2012 – 2022 Capital Priorities Plan with a guideline of 5%
of the Transportation Capital Budget (not including LRT) toward Active
Transportation Projects. Nine Council members were present at the
tabling of this motion, and all were in favour of it.

We at the TPRAC are asking all candidates for the 2010 municipal
election about their stance on this important topic: will you support
the direction of City Administration to prepare the 2012 – 2022
Capital Priorities Plan with a guideline of 5% of the Transportation
Capital Budget (not including LRT) toward Active Transportation
Projects?